SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(UK) 41

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J., SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Mohd. Rizwan – Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition (M/B) No. 171 of 2026
Decided On : 20-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi and Mr. Deepak Mishra, learned counsel.
For the Respondents: Mr. Gajendra Tripathi and Mr. Y.C. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel, Ms. Menka Tripathi, learned counsel.

Contractors authorized under mining rules can issue e-challans for overloading, validating the enforcement actions taken when regulations are contravened.

Headnote:(A) Uttarakhand Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 2023 - Rule 69 - Writ petition challenging vehicle challans for alleged overloading while transporting ordinary soil - Authority to issue challans was vested with a contractor as per directive from the Government - The petitioner was found transporting beyond the authorized limits, and the e-challans were correctly issued. (Paras 1-12)

(B) Powers of Contractor - The contractor, authorized as per Rules, can stop vehicles and issue challans to prevent illegal mining - The petitioner was not in compliance with the transportation limits set forth in the e-Ravanna, justifying the issuance of the e-challans. (Paras 6-8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash the vehicle challans issued under the authority of the Director of Geology and Mining for alleged overloading of vehicles transporting legally purchased soil. The vehicles were checked by a District In-Charge contractor, who alleged overloading based on e-Ravanna data.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that the contractor had the authority to issue the challans, and the vehicles could be returned upon payment of the penalty under protest, preserving the petitioner's right to dispute the e-challans.

Issues: The key issues were the authority of the contractor to issue challans, the legality of the challans issued against the petitioner, and the process of returning the seized vehicles.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court upheld that the contractor acted within authority granted by the government rules, thus validating the e-challans, and allowed the petitioner to pay the penalty to retrieve the vehicles while retaining the right to contest the matter legally.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions on payment and vehicle retrieval.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for judicial relief (Para 1)
2. petitioner's claims regarding vehicle detention (Para 2)
3. court's inquiries into authority of respondent no. 5 (Para 3 , 4)
4. understanding of rule 69 (concession rules) (Para 5 , 6)
5. validity of e-challans issued (Para 7 , 8)
6. petitioner's offer to comply with penalty (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
7. order on writ petition outcome (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed, praying for the following reliefs :-

“i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned Vehicle Challan No.VC6700001044 dated 10.3.2026, Vehicle Challan No.VC6700001045 dated 10.3.2026 and Vehicle Challan No.VC6700001046 dated 10.3.2026 issued under the authority of Director of Geology and Mining of Uttarakhand (contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition).

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to release the vehicles of the petitioner confiscated by the impugned Vehicle Challan No.VC6700001044 dated 10.3.2026,Vehicle Challan No.VC6700001045 dated 10.3.2026 and Vehicle Challan No. VC6700001046 dated 10.3.2026.”

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was transporting ordinary soil, purchased from one Guru Kripa Enterprises, through Inter State Transit Pass, issued under Uttarakhand Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 2023. On 10.03.2026, the vehicles were checked at Matish Check Post by one Krishna Teja, District In-Charge, Kailash Riverbed Mineral, Udham Singh Nagar. It is alleged that he, without examining the Transit Pass, forcibly got the vehicles weighed and challaned, alleging overloading. The submission is that respondent no. 5 is a private person, and he had no authority to challan or detain the vehicles.

3. In view of the said submission, we granted time on 19.03.2026 to learned State Counsel to obtain instructions, as regards the power of respondent no. 5 to detain the vehicles, or issue any challan.

4. Learned State Counsel has placed on record the instructions received from the District Mining Officer dated 19.03.2026. The stand taken therein is that respondent no. 5 has been given contract after inviting tenders, in terms of Rule 69 (5) of the Uttarakhand Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 2023. It is also the case of the respondents that the trucks were found overloaded, and that the e-Ravanna, on basis of which the minor minerals were being transported, authorized the petitioner to transport 30 tonnes of ordinary soil, while after the vehicles were intercepted, the petitioner got another set of e-Ravannas generated to cover up the illegality.

5. Rule 69 of the Uttarakhand Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 2023 reads as follows :-

“69. Proprietary or Dead Rent may be collected through contractor/tender:-

(1) The Government may arrange for the collection of Proprietary or Dead Rent from the holders of mining leases by the selected contractor/successful tenderer and such holders shall, when directed by the State Government to do so, pay Proprietary or Dead Rent at the rates specified in their lease to the said contractors/tenderers within such period as may be directed.

(2) Non-payment of dues by the selected contractor/successful tenderer or the holder of the mining lease or the ownership or dead rent, as the case may be, shall have the same consequences as if the payment was made to the State Government and in that event the State Government shall have all such rights as are provided in these rules in respect of recovery of the dues from the lessee and termination of the lease.

(3) The State Government may enter into an agreement with any person, as deemed fit, for collection of ownership or dead rent from the holders of mining leases in the specified area for a period of five years or more, by negotiation or inviting tenders or by e-tender/e-auction or in any other manner on such terms and conditions as may be considered appropriate. For determining the criteria of el

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top